- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 7/13/25 at 11:44 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
His lawyer said "I've got to do better. Put it on me."
Posted on 7/13/25 at 12:01 pm to BZ504
Thing that bugs me the most about her. During the 19 season she would run on the field after the game to walk with O when he was going to shake hands with the opposing coach. She knew she would be on tv and had to make herself known. I can't stand her.
Posted on 7/13/25 at 12:10 pm to JPLSU1981
quote:
It’s merely a prepayment of future earnings under the contract had he continued to be employed. She was never entitled to those future earnings to begin with post-divorce. So she shouldn’t be entitled to the lump sum buyout prepayment of future earnings.
Actually, the buy-out wasn’t a lump sum payment. His extension was 5yrs guaranteed and the buyout has been paid over 5 yrs. The last payment will be made this December.
Posted on 7/13/25 at 3:16 pm to lsupride87
[
I agree. I think the value of the buyout has to be included in the value of the contract that was sign when they were married because it was guaranteed money. I would assume he would have to pay alimony for the term of the contract or part of the buyout. Half does seem kind of hefty though.
quote:
He earned that buyout while married though
I agree. I think the value of the buyout has to be included in the value of the contract that was sign when they were married because it was guaranteed money. I would assume he would have to pay alimony for the term of the contract or part of the buyout. Half does seem kind of hefty though.
Posted on 7/13/25 at 9:19 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
As Ed's Mama said when he fricked LSU...
Baby, go get paid....
After the way he acted when he left here...I hope she bankrupts him.
..
Baby, go get paid....
After the way he acted when he left here...I hope she bankrupts him.
..
Posted on 7/13/25 at 9:26 pm to Tshirts
quote:exactly
I agree. I think the value of the buyout has to be included in the value of the contract that was sign when they were married because it was guaranteed money. I would assume he would have to pay alimony for the term of the contract or part of the buyout. Half does seem kind of hefty though.
The contract was in place prior to the divorce therefore all terms were in place.
Posted on 7/13/25 at 9:40 pm to Tshirts
quote:
half does seem kind of hefty
Community property is 50%.
Posted on 7/13/25 at 11:30 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
frick this loser. I hope she gets her 1/2.
Posted on 7/14/25 at 1:48 am to Tshirts
quote:
I think the value of the buyout has to be included in the value of the contract that was sign when they were married because it was guaranteed money. I would assume he would have to pay alimony for the term of the contract or part of the buyout. Half does seem kind of hefty though.
No. As far as I can tell from the opinion, she didn't get any of the salary he was paid under that contract in 2020 or 2021 (after the termination of the community in February 2020). The majority invented the notion of the buyout specifically being some form of community asset golden parachute, which I'm not aware of Louisiana law ever contemplating before. McCallum's dissent seemed to make it pretty clear that he thought the majority (which, oddly, was majority retired non-justices appointed ad hoc for this case) had already decided to give her the money, and then made up some legalese-sounding bs to justify it. That makes more sense than what the majority wrote.
Posted on 7/14/25 at 10:37 am to lsupride87
quote:
When he was being a belligerent drunk and she kept the family together and his life from shambles thus allowing his career to continue is a big part of him getting to earning that buyout
Not sure where you heard this rumor. The rumor i heard, is his now ex-wife making a scene at a bunch of dinners. Some say she appeared to be bipolar. At one of the dinners she made a big scene in front of people, players, etc... and that is what caused Ed to file for divorce, allegedly.
This post was edited on 7/14/25 at 10:42 am
Posted on 7/14/25 at 11:06 am to Volvagia
quote:
The divorce was finalized before he left LSU.
I believe they were separated shortly after the national championship too. I wonder if they were separated when he got his new contract. Too lazy to look that up. That would be an interesting fact if I'm hearing the case.
Posted on 7/14/25 at 11:07 am to BugAC
quote:
Not sure where you heard this rumor. The rumor i heard, is his now ex-wife making a scene at a bunch of dinners. Some say she appeared to be bipolar. At one of the dinners she made a big scene in front of people, players, etc... and that is what caused Ed to file for divorce, allegedly.
They both have had constant ebbing and flowing of substance abuse issues. In Oxford, they had restraining orders filed against each other at one point
Posted on 7/14/25 at 5:18 pm to Tiger1988
quote:
The contract was in place prior to the divorce therefore all terms were in place.
people here cant understand this...
Posted on 7/14/25 at 7:05 pm to chRxis
quote:
people here cant understand this...
This is as much about contract law as it is community property from a divorce. The terms of the contract stated that upon certain conditions LSU would pay him. If he completely violated some terms that didn’t warrant a buy out like NCAA issues or Title IX, then he wouldn’t get any buy out. That contract was executed before he was divorced and in place when he was fired for non-performance therefore he was entitled to agreed upon provisions. The only way she wouldn’t be entitled to that specific clause is if the contract was voided and as he continued employment (his next contract). At least that’s how I read this.
I do not agree with paying her another penny to be abundantly clear.
Posted on 7/14/25 at 7:08 pm to BugAC
quote:Rumor? It’s straight from Ed Oregon’s mouth
Not sure where you heard this rumor
Posted on 7/14/25 at 7:14 pm to grich31
quote:
so it's mute argument
Just in case you want to know, it's moot, not mute, in this scenario.
Posted on 7/14/25 at 7:18 pm to lsupride87
quote:quote:Rumor? It’s straight from Ed Oregon’s mouth
Not sure where you heard this rumor
I recall that as well, but my memory s suspect these days
Posted on 7/14/25 at 11:19 pm to grich31
quote:
mute argument
Moot.
Posted on 7/14/25 at 11:21 pm to kajunman
quote:
had to make herself known
Like DeAngelo Sanchez?
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News